Go to the HOME PAGE | Go to the Local History index | Back to the Contents Page

THE PHYSICAL FORM OF THE VILLAGE (Map V & Map VI)

The basic aim of this study is to trace the development of the village using field and documentary evidence and an integral part of this is an analysis of the village form in an attempt to discover whether it can reveal anything of past arrangements in the plan, its economic function and/or its development (Aston & Rowley 1974). To enable analysis the information has been split into three categories which, however, cannot be seen in isolation and which all have a bearing on each other. These categories are:-

1. a consideration of the various foci within the village, both past and present.
2. the road/footpath pattern.
3. a consideration of the present field pattern and whether it throws any light on the past organisation of the village and its fields.

A glance at the maps V and VI will show that there are four principle foci to the settlement which overall is called Burbage, namely: Stibb Green, Westcourt, Eastcourt and Burbage. It can be termed a polyfocal settlement - a form which has been discussed at some length by C. Taylor (Med. Arch. 1977 XXI). He posits a series of development sequences leading to such a form:-

1. that it is a stage of development through which some villages have passed to reach a nucleated settlement.
2. that it is a result of normal organic growth from a single nucleated village, particularly likely in areas of woodland or waste.
3. that it is a result of planned additions by the establishment of new fees in post-Domesday contexts.
4. d) that it reflects an early Saxon pattern either growing out of separate foci as a result of difference in land ownership or continuing the dispersed arrangement of settlements or farmsteads scattered over large areas.

In connection with the difference in land ownership is the suggestion that individual foci are connected with the location of major manor-houses as Taylor has found in Cambridge. Burbage is unusual in being multi-manorial in an area where individual manors are almost always separate settlements. In the Midland villages, usually considered as being multi-manorial, there is no physical distinction between the manors and therefore the Cambridgeshire findings need not necessarily apply here. Crawford (WAM XLI) considered that the three manors of Burbage Darrells, Burbage Esturmey and Burbage Savage, first mentioned in the early 14th century, could be identified with Westcourt, Burbage and Eastcourt, although he could not make a one-to-one correlation. However, later documentary evidence (deeds and manorial rolls from the Savernake Estate) suggest that this is not an accurate picture and that the Esturmey manor centred around Durley (A.D. 6/219), the Savage manor centred around Southgrove/Goldenlands farm and the other manor cannot be placed. Thus, as far as manorial division within the village is concerned, it seems to bear no relation to the physical division of the village and this is borne out by the intermingling of the fields of the respective manors.

What then is the character of the various foci ? Stibb Green, first mentioned in the documentary evidence in 1613 as Stibmarshe and suggested, philologically as being derived from the probable home of Alan atte Stubbe (1264 Devizes), is situated at a fork in the road and clusters around a triangular green. There was a pound on the north side of the green, frequently mentioned in Forest Court rolls in connection with the inhabitants of neighbouring villages allowing their cattle to graze on Burbage Common rather than driving them into the forest and consequently being empounded. The majority of the houses around the green are 18th century but this may reflect no more than the nature and durability of the building materials although earlier examples have survived elsewhere in the village. Although it sounds platitudinous, I would suggest that a focus developed around the green when the green developed. As it is triangular I would conjecture that this was when the fork in the road became a major feature. The problem lies in dating such a development - since the road leads to Durley and Tottenham Park it could have been when Tottenham House replaced Wolfhall as the home of the Wardens in 1587. Prior to this Stibb Green could have been an isolated farmstead. It lies close to Burbage Common which was not completely enclosed until 1824 but which may have been subject to piecemeal enclosure before this time, suggested by the somewhat irregular pattern of the fields on the west of Stibb Green. Therefore, another contributory factor to the development of this focus could be the taking in of new land, i.e. expansion.

Westcourt, first mentioned in the documents in 1264 as Westcote, is the only focus which has visibly shrunk as can be seen from comparing Maps V and VI. It has no real focus, such as the green of Stibb Green and appears simply to be a linear development along the road running parallel to Burhstrete. Most of the buildings standing today are late 17th/18th century in date. I would suggest again that Westcourt is the result of expansion at a time when new land was being taken in, enclosed or perhaps simply occupied by its owner(s) who had previously lived in the village. This tallies with the implication of the -cote suffix, suggesting the home of a cottar. Alternatively the road may have been instrumental in its development, although with Burhstrete so close this seems incidental rather than vital.

The relationship between Eastcourt, first mentioned in 1257, and Burbage is more problematical. Eastcourt (the -court having the same implication as in Westcourt) represents what is traditionally thought of as the "typical" English village clustered round a green in the middle of which stands the church (Plate 8). The row of houses on the west side of the green shows great regularity in layout, akin to that along Burhstrete whereas the buildings to the east of the church are scattered in small irregular plots of land rather than being associated with long holdings stretching back from the road. The oldest remaining part of the church is the tower, dated 1450 (Fig. 2), but a church was mentioned in Domesday and periodically from this time (see chapter 4). While it cannot be proved without excavation that the church was always on this site, no evidence has been produced to suggest an alternative in spite of the extensive building activity carried out in the past ten years along this side of Burhstrete. The temptation is to see this as having been the original site of the church and the area round it as having been, if not the original, one of the oldest sites of settlement in the village. However, there are a number of problems in this interpretation - granted that the church was practically rebuilt in the mid 19th century with all the effects this may have had on the graveyard - there are no gravestones earlier than the 19th century. In addition, the suggested derivation of the name, Burbage, does not seem applicable to this site. Therefore, it is necessary to discuss the relationship between Eastcourt and Burbage, a subject best analysed in the light of the network of footpaths linking the two foci and the field pattern around them (see below).

Burbage is a row village stretching for 1.7 km along the road. For the greater part of the length the houses are built up on banks about 4 metres high. According to the Sites & Monuments Survey, medieval settlement is sited around the church in Eastcourt and 200 metres to either side of the Westcourt/Eastcourt crossroads but no concrete evidence can be provided other than the interpretation of the footpath/field patterns. Various inhabitants have found pottery in their gardens but none was available for inspection. The holdings of the houses show great regularity in layout stretching back from the main road almost suggesting some type of planning.

THE ROAD/FOOTPATH PATTERN

As touched upon in chapter 2, the Herepath is believed to have run along the line of the present Easton Royal-Burbage road and the name survives in Harepath Common and Harepath Farm. As Map V shows there were a number of roads running north-south through the village. At one time the road through Westcourt continued on down through Westcourt continued on down through Burbage Common to Ram Alley but this became redundant in 1824 because of the Enclosure Act. Equally as a comparison between Maps V and VI shows, the building of the canal and railway caused a rearrangement of the roads to the north of the village. Burhstrete itself gives the impression of great antiquity because of the high banks but until the early 20th century it was just surfaced with flints and considering the nature of the soil, liable to wear down rapidly. The banks running along the lane leading from Burhstrete to Eastcourt and continuing round to the east of the church are also high - about 2.5-3 metres - and hedgerow dating with all its attendant pitfalls suggests that the hedges are at least 600 years old. The lane running south from Eastcourt to the Easton Royal road is bounded by planted hawthorn hedges, a ditch but no banks. The Westcourt road runs between high, 3 metre banks but the hedges have been torn up. The link with Burhstrete has been altered as a result of enclosure as a comparison between Maps V and VI will show. Thus, in comparison with the other lanes around the village, the lane running from Burbage to and around Eastcourt seems to be of some age which may shed light on the nature of the relationship between the two. In addition to the main routes running through and around the village there are a number of drove roads running in from the downs, e.g. from Crowdon Clump onto the main Marlborough-Salisbury road.

The network of footpaths, particularly running from the main street to Eastcourt, is complex. As along the lanes the paths are bordered by high banks. The footpath running parallel to the main street runs along the back of the holdings of the houses. There is a remarkable concentration of four footpaths running between Burbage and Eastcourt within a space of 300 metres, one of which is known as the Church path (Plate 7). Unfortunately, there is no means of dating these paths which might have provided some clue as to the time when either Burbage or Eastcourt was established. It is interesting that by the start of three of the footpaths a sarsen stone is deeply embedded.

THE FIELD PATTERN

Unlike the surrounding villages most of Burbage had been enclosed before the Act of 1824 and no open-field system is shown. However, documentary evidence in the form of manorial rolls and leases indicates that there were once common fields, although these seem to have been subject to enclosure from the 17th century onwards. Aerial photographs do not indicate any traces of ridge and furrow but this was noticed when walking across the fields to the east of Seymour Pond - the distance between the ridges was an average 12 yards which suggests a medieval date.

A certain amount of information is given in documentary evidence about the land lying between Eastcourt and Burhstrete. The fields are small, rectangular and still arable. Their names all contain the element church, e.g. Church Sands, Church Ground, Church Green, Church Lands - whether this means that at one point it belonged to the church, that an early church was sited there or simply that the land was named after the nearest identifiable feature, it is not possible to say. The land's position between what appear to be the two oldest areas of settlement suggest that perhaps it was part of an infield-outfield system, these fields representing the permanent arable area. Such a system would not be unlikely in a forest area.

The only remnant of commonable land in and around Burbage is Burbage Common near the canal. A series of possible fish-ponds is sited here although not mentioned in any manorial documents (Appendix II). In later years the field is called Sheepwash Meadow which suggests that subsequently they may have been used for sheep-dipping. The other commonable areas of Harepath Common, Short Heath Common and Margreen Common are shown on Map V and were enclosed in 1824.

CONCLUSIONS

Working with C.Taylor's analysis of the possible processes leading to polyfocal settlement, several hypotheses can be put forward to suggest the possible course of development of Burbage using field and documentary evidence. The physical evidence, i.e. the property division boundaries, network of footpaths and position of the church, suggest that the oldest nucleus of settlement lies around the church and near the crossroads on Burhstrete. The very regular pattern of settlement along Burhstrete and to the west of the church suggest some form of planning - certainly the figure of the Warden of Savernake Forest provides someone with the authority to organize such a venture. This interpretation, seeing Eastcourt as the basic nucleus of settlement would also explain the pre-1330 forest bailiwick division insofar as the boundary of La Verme bailey, including Eastcourt, runs down Burhstrete splitting the village which seems a curious feature if the settlement along the road were not a later development. In this interpretation the presence of the road is of considerable importance and it may be that the settlement emphasis shifted when the road became of major importance - most likely when the ridgeway route replaced the Roman roads. An additional cause of this could be the granting of burh status to Marlborough by 1086 which might have brought increased traffic through the village. In connection with this, one suggestion as to why a large number of houses are set at right-angles to the road is that it gives greater ease of access for wagons etc. to the building (Aston & Rowley 1974). Alternatively, it may just reflect a desire for a south-facing frontage. As to why Eastcourt holds that name with all the implications of being a secondary settlement, the name does not appear on the Andrews and Drury map and may have come into usage when the settlement area of primary importance had shifted to the road.

On the other hand, the tendency may be to look too hard for areas of nucleated settlement when the pattern may have been far more dispersed and no one area can be postulated as being the site of original settlement. This seems likely in an area of woodland/waste and can be seen in the fact that there are other foci within the parish - Ram Alley, Durley, Southgrove farm. Thus the polyfocal nature of Burbage could be the result of organic growth from single, dispersed hamlets or farmsteads. There are no signs of shrinkage within the village apart from along the Westcourt road and it still expanding - in the 18th century houses were built for the canal and railway navvies and now extensive housing estates are being developed for commuters and retirees. This all suggests that once the potential of the site was recognized it developed into an area of fairly dense settlement with a probable old nucleus around Eastcourt.

Go to the HOME PAGE | Go to the Local History index | Back to the Contents Page